From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] make a couple eth_dev_ops const Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 16:38:56 +0100 Message-ID: <1859631.d3X9H1Gb87@xps13> References: <20170112191212.22710-1-stephen@networkplumber.org> <088c65d6-e709-23dd-3a86-e90e192fd30f@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Ferruh Yigit To: Stephen Hemminger Return-path: Received: from mail-lf0-f45.google.com (mail-lf0-f45.google.com [209.85.215.45]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24825BD2A for ; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 16:38:59 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-lf0-f45.google.com with SMTP id k86so40535554lfi.0 for ; Fri, 13 Jan 2017 07:38:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <088c65d6-e709-23dd-3a86-e90e192fd30f@intel.com> List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2017-01-12 21:54, Ferruh Yigit: > On 1/12/2017 7:12 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote: > > Really trivial patches. > > Patches are not in patchwork, and not in the mail list. > > > I also consider this a litmus test of how long it takes DPDK > > project to merge trivial maintaince patches. This is a nice example of why patches are not merged timely, sometimes they are not received at all :) In order to reduce the time needed to merge, could you please run devtools/check-git-log.sh ?